protosciencefandomcom-20200215-history
Talk:String theory
The following is from the Wikipedia talk page Why Why 10 dimensions? B-) How is this encyclopedic? Why isn't the title nominal? --ESP 06:02, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC) What is Encyclopedic? "Anything academic - Someone or something that would be mentioned in a textbook or research paper, and which is notable or famous at least within its field." "Why 10 dimensions?" is a topic that is discussed in books such as Michio Kaku's book "Hyperspace" and on prominant websites dealing with string theory. The existing Wikipedia pages on string theory do not cover this issue. Name of the page. "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." This "name" was taken from sources that discuss this issue such as: http://www.ecf.toronto.edu/~quanv/String/string9.html If there was a better name in use I would be glad to use it. "Dimensionality of the universe" or "Dimensionality of String Theory" are possibilies, but I have not seen these terms used in the string theory literature in relation to the issue discussed here. JWSchmidt 07:56, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC) Wikibooks for "education"? I was initially inspired to start the "Why_10_dimensions?" page when I saw this page. However, I have now become aware of the possibility of putting "educational" information into Wikibooks. I am exploring the idea of moving the Why 10 dimensions page to this book. JWSchmidt 15:39, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC) :That sounds like a good idea. --ESP 02:57, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC) ::Considering the article's style, it would probably be appropriate for Wikibooks. An article with the name "Reasons for the number of dimensions of the universe" or something similar would however have its place on Wikipedia, so it would be best not to move it but to copy it. Fredrik (talk) 03:34, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC) Ramanujan function Does anyone have a source of the "Ramanujan function" that has terms (D-24) or another "generalized" form with (D-8)? Maybe one of the references here? I'm not sure how to find these physics articles online. I could not access online: A. M. Polyakov, Quantum geometry of bosonic strings, Phys. Lett. B103 (1981), 207. But this: "Quantum geometry of bosonic strings : revisited" has the following equation: and cites another article by A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B103 (1981), 211. as the source of an equation with D = 10 as the critical dimension for a supersymmetric bosonic quantum field. JWSchmidt 03:56, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC) Energy loss to higher dimensions Could someone explain why energy conservation laws works in 3 dimensions (i.e.: no "escape" of energy to higher level dimensions) ? Rama 23:02, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC) ____ In the November 26, 2004 issue of Science magazine, there is an article about attempts to link string theory to experiments: "a few of string theory's extra dimensions might be wound loosely enough to be detected in {the Large Hadron Collider facility at CERN that should become operational in 2007}. If those dimensions are big enough, matter and energy might disappear into them when high-energy particles collide." Apparently, string theory predicts that the compact dimensions are only able to take in energy under high-energy conditions that do not normally exist at the low temperature conditions familiar to us on Earth. I think that according to the idea of suppersummetry, under the high-energy conditions of the early universe, there was free exchange of energy between all the dimesions. When the universe cooled, the symmetry broke and some of the spatial dimensions collapsed and could no longer freely exchange energy with our 3 extended spatial dimensions Memenen 04:29, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC) ____ Hmmm, interesting, something like these dimension being "small", and high energy being related to high frequency, so small wavelength, so... makes sense. I should be less lazy and go interview specialists which are available next to me, actually :p Thanks for caring to write ! Rama 07:21, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC) Extra Dimentions. I read with interest the theory that extra spatial dimentions exist. However, this view is at variance with one expressed by Professor Stephen Hawking, who remarked that " if there were more than three spatial dimentions, the orbits of planets around the sun or electrons around a nucleus would be unstable and they would tend to spiral inward." Derek R Crawford. :The extra dimensions would be far too small to be relevant to planetary orbits, or even atomic orbits. -Lethe | Talk 11:03, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)